Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Tribunal allowed CSC’s request to seal exhibit R-523, placing a redacted version on the record and keeping the unredacted exhibit confidential after the complaints were dismissed.
The Ontario Court of Appeal denied M.E. leave to file a notice of appeal, finding the proposed appeal frivolous and vexatious and no basis to disturb the delay dismissal.
The Tribunal granted the confidentiality order in substantially the form proposed because the protection of confidential commercial information, investigative techniques and sensitive personal information outweighed the public interest in immediate disclosure; the Order defines Protected Records, prescribes Level B access, sets procedures for designation and re-designation, regulates compelled disclosure, and provides for return or destruction of records and Tribunal enforcement.
Source excerpt
Permanent sealing was required because prior final sealing orders from British Columbia and appellate review in Nova Scotia created a serious risk to the important public interest of judicial comity if this Court file remained open; no reasonable less intrusive alternatives would address that risk because the refiled materials are intertwined and pervasive; and sealing is proportionate given the proceeding's enforcement stage where the underlying disputes are finally resolved.
Source excerpt
Because the Applicant demonstrated that disclosure of specified categories of information could cause specific and direct harm, and the Respondent consented to the proposed protective regime, the Tribunal exercised its authority under the Competition Act and Rules to issue a confidentiality order in substantially the form proposed, establishing defined categories of protected records, a two-level access regime, procedures for designation and challenge, and post-proceeding handling requirements.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal granted redaction of specific personal identifiers (address, date of birth, phone number, social insurance number and health card number) because those are routinely redacted and no public interest required disclosure, but refused anonymization and broader confidentiality because the applicant failed to specify which documents/parts warranted protection or to provide evidence of a real and substantial risk of undue hardship to justify departing from the open court principle.
Source excerpt
The motions judge properly applied the elevated Rule 30.10 test: GRE's financial records were relevant to a material issue (valuation of the estate's 12.5% share and related testamentary and dependency issues) and disclosure was necessary for fairness; the judge appropriately tailored the order and implemented a Confidentiality Protocol to mitigate prejudice, and the Court of Appeal will not interfere with that discretionary case-management decision.
Source excerpt
The Tax Court of Canada granted Future Electronics a permanent confidentiality order, allowing limited redactions of transcript excerpts to protect confidential commercial information.
The appeal is allowed because the Commission did not prove on the balance of probabilities that the Appellant actually accessed her mother’s medical records as alleged; the Appellant’s credible evidence about how database searches by date of birth can register access, and the employer’s failure to produce specific proof, means the attributed acts were not established and therefore there was no misconduct under the Employment Insurance Act.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court dismissed Double Diamond’s motion to keep its financial statements confidential, finding it failed the Sierra Club test for sealing.
Explore more
